Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

DNS trickery is the ultimate step for a fully flexible architecture. Unfortunately it requires to have some admin rights over your own domain. Something uber difficult in companies. A workaround would be to create a top domain name, something like ..uris (or more realistically cooluris.net), with

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Externalizing the 303 feature is the good idea, imo. But such a service should also handle the content negociation feature. So the 303 may redirect to different URLs depending on the content negociated. This makes the service more complex internally but provides a very relevant service for RDF pub

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 10:46 AM, Pierre-Antoine Champin wrote: > > However, some people will still be concerned about naming their resources > under a domain that is not theirs. That is not only a matter of > URI-prettiness, but also of relying on an external service, which may cease > to exist tom

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

I like this! :) However, some people will still be concerned about naming their resources under a domain that is not theirs. That is not only a matter of URI-prettiness, but also of relying on an external service, which may cease to exist tomorrow. However, this could easily be solved. All w

Re: Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

(Discussing 303-redirect services, such as http://t-d-b.org/ or http://thing-described-by.org/ ) On Thu 09/07/09 6:12 AM , Olivier Rossel olivier.ros...@gmail.com sent: > Externalizing the 303 feature is the good idea, imo. > > But such a service should also handle the content negociation fea

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

On 09/07/2009 07:56, "Peter Ansell" wrote: > 2009/7/9 Juan Sequeda : >> On Jul 9, 2009, at 2:25 AM, Hugh Glaser wrote: >>> Mind you, it does mean that you should make sure that you don't put too >>> many >>> LD URIs in one document. >>> If dbpedia decided to represent all the RDF in one documen

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Hashed URIs can bring other problems. For example, if I have a service http://mydata.org/uri that takes a URI and returns what it knows about the thing identified by that URI and I pass it a hash URI, e.g. http://ci.nii.ac.jp/naid/110006281382#article , my browser will trim #article and send

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

In message @ecs.soton.ac.uk>, Hugh Glaser writes Hash URIs are very valuable in linked data, precisely *because* they can't be directly requested from a server - they allow us to bypass the whole HTTP 303 issue. Mind you, it does mean that you should make sure that you don't put too many LD U

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

On 9 Jul 2009, at 07:44, Juan Sequeda wrote: On Jul 9, 2009, at 2:25 AM, Hugh Glaser wrote: Mind you, it does mean that you should make sure that you don't put too many LD URIs in one document. If dbpedia decided to represent all the RDF in one document, and then use hash URIs, it would

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

2009/7/9 Juan Sequeda : > On Jul 9, 2009, at 2:25 AM, Hugh Glaser wrote: >> On 09/07/2009 00:38, "Toby A Inkster" wrote: >> >>> On 8 Jul 2009, at 19:58, Seth Russell wrote: >>> Is it not true that everything past the hash (#alice) is not transmitted back to the server when a browser cli

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

On Jul 9, 2009, at 2:25 AM, Hugh Glaser wrote: On 09/07/2009 00:38, "Toby A Inkster" wrote: On 8 Jul 2009, at 19:58, Seth Russell wrote: Is it not true that everything past the hash (#alice) is not transmitted back to the server when a browser clicks on a hyperlink ? If that is true, t

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Hi Martin, all, I would like to point to something that might be useful for RDF data publishing. The ReDeFer RDF2HTML service (http://rhizomik.net/redefer/) renders input RDF/XML data as HTML for user interaction (e.g. as used in http://rhizomik.net/rhizomer/). Now, it also embeds RDFa that facili

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

On 09/07/2009 00:38, "Toby A Inkster" wrote: > On 8 Jul 2009, at 19:58, Seth Russell wrote: > >> Is it not true that everything past the hash (#alice) is not >> transmitted back to the server when a browser clicks on a >> hyperlink ? If that is true, then the server would not be able to >> ser

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

On 8 Jul 2009, at 19:58, Seth Russell wrote: Is it not true that everything past the hash (#alice) is not transmitted back to the server when a browser clicks on a hyperlink ? If that is true, then the server would not be able to serve anything different if a browser clicked upon http://

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Martin Hepp (UniBW) wrote: Google has just changed the wording of the documentation: http://knol.google.com/k/google-rich-snippets/google-rich-snippets/32la2chf8l79m/1# The mentioning of cloaking risk is removed. While this is not final clearance, it is a nice sign that our concerns are he

Re: Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

On Wed 08/07/09 5:08 PM , Olivier Rossel olivier.ros...@gmail.com sent: > Do you mean that all deferencable URIs of a RDF document should have > their domain name to end with t-d-b.org, so their resolution leads to > the TDB server which redirects to the final location? No, I'm not suggesting th

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Sorry to hear that, Pat. On 08/07/2009 14:51, "Pat Hayes" wrote: > > > On Jul 5, 2009, at 10:16 AM, Hugh Glaser wrote: > >> OK, I'll have a go :-) >> Why did I think this would be fun to do on a sunny Sunday morning >> that has turned into afternoon? >> Here are the instructions: >> > > And

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

On Wed, 2009-07-08 at 15:50 +0100, Pierre-Antoine Champin wrote: [ . . . ] > ok, the solutions proposed here (by myself and others) still involve > editing the .htaccess. Once again, use of a 303-redirect service such as http://thing-described-by.org/ or http://t-d-b.org/ does not require *any*

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

On Wednesday, July 8, 2009, Toby Inkster wrote: > On Wed, 2009-07-08 at 15:13 +0100, Mark Birbeck wrote: >> The original point of this thread seemed to me to be saying that if >> .htaccess is the key to the semantic web, then it's never going to >> happen. > > It simply isn't the key to the semant

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

> > > But all that isn't necessary to publish linked data. If you own > example.com, you can upload foaf.rdf and give yourself a URI like: > > > > I'm going to ask a stupid question ... don't everybody laugh at once. Is it not true that everything past th

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

On Wed, 2009-07-08 at 15:13 +0100, Mark Birbeck wrote: > The original point of this thread seemed to me to be saying that if > .htaccess is the key to the semantic web, then it's never going to > happen. It simply isn't the key to the semantic web though. .htaccess is a simple way to configure Ap

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Mark, disclaimer: I have nothing against the RDFa solution; I just don't think that one size fits all :) ok, the solutions proposed here (by myself and others) still involve editing the .htaccess. However, compared to configuring HTTP redirections using mod_rewrite, they have two advantages:

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Hi Pat, > I have checked with my system admin, and they tell me, Yes that is correct. > You cannot access your .htaccess file. You cannot modify it or paste > anything into it. Only we have access to it. No, we will not change this > policy for you, no matter how important you think you are. Altho

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

On Jul 5, 2009, at 10:16 AM, Hugh Glaser wrote: OK, I'll have a go :-) Why did I think this would be fun to do on a sunny Sunday morning that has turned into afternoon? Here are the instructions: And here is why I cannot follow them. 1. Create a web-accessible directory, let's say foo

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Google has just changed the wording of the documentation: http://knol.google.com/k/google-rich-snippets/google-rich-snippets/32la2chf8l79m/1# The mentioning of cloaking risk is removed. While this is not final clearance, it is a nice sign that our concerns are heard. Best Martin Martin Hepp

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Richard Light wrote: In message <4a50ad9f.9030...@champin.net>, Pierre-Antoine Champin writes PS: any IIS user volunteering to translate those recipies to IIS configuration? I have implemented the 303 redirection strategy in IIS, but using a custom 404 "page not found" error handler. Is t

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

In message <4a50ad9f.9030...@champin.net>, Pierre-Antoine Champin writes PS: any IIS user volunteering to translate those recipies to IIS configuration? I have implemented the 303 redirection strategy in IIS, but using a custom 404 "page not found" error handler. Is that relevant to this

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Toby A Inkster wrote: On 5 Jul 2009, at 01:52, Pierre-Antoine Champin wrote: I guess a PHP version would not even require that .htaccess, but sorry, I'm not fluent in PHP ;) The situation with PHP should be much the same, though I suppose web hosts might be more likely to set index.php in t

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

yay!! more "easy-lod" goodness! more incentive to get this up on linkeddata.org this week! do we have any volunteers for ruby? Juan Sequeda, Ph.D Student Dept. of Computer Sciences The University of Texas at Austin www.juansequeda.com www.semanticwebaustin.org On Sun, Jul 5, 2009 at 5:16 PM, Hu

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

OK, I'll have a go :-) Why did I think this would be fun to do on a sunny Sunday morning that has turned into afternoon? Here are the instructions: 1. Create a web-accessible directory, let's say foobar, with all your .rdf, .ttl, .ntriples and .html files in it. 2. Copy lodpub.php and path.

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Note that I managed to have extension-less script run. Recipe 2 (advantage over the 'index.php' recipe: works with slash based namespaces; disadvantage: 2 more lines in the .htaccess ;) what you need is the following directive in .htaccess (which is allowed by my webmaster) S

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

> We should start a repository somewhere of useful code for serving linked >> data. >> > > I agree. (I raise my hand) If I am not wrong, this thread has given out 4 different implementations for serving linked data. I mentioned before that I wanted to post this on linkeddata.org I will work out

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Le 05/07/2009 13:54, Toby A Inkster a écrit : On 5 Jul 2009, at 01:52, Pierre-Antoine Champin wrote: I guess a PHP version would not even require that .htaccess, but sorry, I'm not fluent in PHP ;) The situation with PHP should be much the same, though I suppose web hosts might be more likel

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

On 5 Jul 2009, at 01:52, Pierre-Antoine Champin wrote: I guess a PHP version would not even require that .htaccess, but sorry, I'm not fluent in PHP ;) The situation with PHP should be much the same, though I suppose web hosts might be more likely to set index.php in the DirectoryIndex as

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Le 03/07/2009 15:14, Danny Ayers a écrit : 2009/7/2 Bill Roberts: I thought I'd give the .htaccess approach a try, to see what's involved in actually setting it up. I'm no expert on Apache, but I know the basics of how it works, I've got full access to a web server and I can read the online Apa

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

2009/7/2 Bill Roberts : > I thought I'd give the .htaccess approach a try, to see what's involved in > actually setting it up.  I'm no expert on Apache, but I know the basics of > how it works, I've got full access to a web server and I can read the online > Apache documentation as well as the next

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Peter Mika wrote: Hi guys, Have you looked at "Best Practice Recipes for Publishing RDF Vocabularies": http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/VM/http-examples/2006-01-18/ Peter Ivan (as W3C rep.), We have a W3C article titled: Best Practice Recipes for Publishing RDF Vocabularies Abstra

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Hi, One solution for this is for someone to create and distribute a simple to deploy Linked Data server with integrated CN that can cover common personal ( introductory ) use cases and eventually scale to enterprise demands. And maybe it could even be opensource and already packaged to be deploye

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Hi guys, Have you looked at "Best Practice Recipes for Publishing RDF Vocabularies": http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/VM/http-examples/2006-01-18/ Peter Juan Sequeda wrote: Hi Bill, Is your code to do the content negotation in RoR available somewhere? I'm trying to come up with examp

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Hi Bill, Is your code to do the content negotation in RoR available somewhere? I'm trying to come up with example code to put up (sometime soon) on the linkeddata.org site. Juan Sequeda, Ph.D Student Dept. of Computer Sciences The University of Texas at Austin www.juansequeda.com www.semanticweb

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

I thought I'd give the .htaccess approach a try, to see what's involved in actually setting it up. I'm no expert on Apache, but I know the basics of how it works, I've got full access to a web server and I can read the online Apache documentation as well as the next person. So... after a

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

2009/7/2 Linde, A.E. : > Could someone summarise this thread in a single (unbiased?) post, please? I'll try to answer the questions, even though I've only skimmed the thread... > a) what is/are the blocks on LOD via RDF The vast majority of publication tools and supporting services are geared t

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

stronomy University of Leicester From: "Martin Hepp (UniBW)" Reply-To: Date: Wed, 1 Jul 2009 16:51:15 +0100 To: Mark Birbeck Cc: , semantic-web at W3C Subject: Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Dear all: Fyi - I am in contact with Google as for the clarification of what kind of empty div/span elements are considered acceptable in the context of RDFa. It may take a few days to get an official statement. Just so that you know it is being taken care of... Martin Mark Birbeck wrote:

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Hi Pat, OK, yelling heard loud and clear :) By way of concrete actions, I gave Ivan Herman a (probably unfairly) hard time today here at Dagstuhl to 'encourage' the authors of the Vocabs Best Practices to press on with the revision of that document that addresses the current issues. An update of

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

On Mon, 2009-06-29 at 01:20 +0200, Tom Heath wrote: > [ . . . ] This discussion only applies to the > 303-redirect/slash URI pattern. You can avoid this completely by using > the hash URI pattern . . . . And as a reminder, you can also use a 303-redirect service if you cannot configure your serve

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

On Jun 28, 2009, at 6:20 PM, Tom Heath wrote: Hi Pat, 2009/6/25 Pat Hayes : With the sincerest respect, Tom, your attitude here is part of the problem. Maybe, along with many other people, I am indeed still stuck in the mid-1990s. You have permission to be as condescending as you like. Bu

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

On Jun 28, 2009, at 6:39 PM, Tim Berners-Lee wrote: On 2009-06 -25, at 13:29, Pat Hayes wrote: On Jun 25, 2009, at 11:44 AM, Martin Hepp (UniBW) wrote: Hi all: After about two months of helping people generate RDF/XML metadata for their businesses using the GoodRelations annotator [1],

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Hi Mark, 2009/6/29 Mark Birbeck : > Hi Tom, > > On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 11:46 PM, Tom Heath wrote: >> Martin, >> >> 2009/6/27 Martin Hepp (UniBW) : >>> So if this "hidden div / span" approach is not feasible, we got a problem. >>> >>> The reason is that, as beautiful the idea is of using RDFa to m

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Thank you, Toby. The EASE is an interesting proposal. As I have said, we at Fuji are now actively looking for a convenient and efficiently way of displaying semantic data. I need to study more of this EASE project. If possible, I would like to have more discussion with you of the topic in the futu

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Hi Martin, > Beyond that, RDFa can create code that is very > hard to maintain. In fact, I know that a large software company > dismissed the use of RDFa in their products because of the unmanageable > mix of conceptual and presentation layer. Now I'm going to sound like I don't believe there are

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Hi Toby, Yes...of course...you are right. :) I would say too, that reification is even more long-winded than the example you have given! You don't have the actual statement "the sky is blue" in your mark-up, so you need even more RDFa. (You only have the statement "Mark says 'the sky is blue'".)

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Hi Martin, I agree to most of your opinions, especially the architecture of data representation you suggest. The only point I would like to emphasize is to figure out a way that eliminates the demand of storing a fact multiple times. Even though you think that it might be inevitable, personally I

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

On Mon, 2009-06-29 at 13:30 +0100, Mark Birbeck wrote: > If we go back a step, RDFa was carefully designed so that it could > carry any combination of the RDF concepts in an HTML document. In the > end we dropped reification and lists, because it didn't seem that the > RDF community itself was clea

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Hi Yihong: I am a big fan of Codd's "one fact in one place" credo. However, in this particular case, that principle is violated anyway, since the literal values are often duplicated for presentation and meta-data prupolses anyway (think of "2009-06-29" vs. "June 29, 2009"). Second, for dynamic Web

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Hi Tom, On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 11:46 PM, Tom Heath wrote: > Martin, > > 2009/6/27 Martin Hepp (UniBW) : >> So if this "hidden div / span" approach is not feasible, we got a problem. >> >> The reason is that, as beautiful the idea is of using RDFa to make a) the >> human-readable presentation and

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Hi Kingley and Martin, A potential problem of the model Martin suggested is that the same data has to be presented at least TWICE in one document. Although the RDFa portion of the data is supposed to be automatically generated, it, however, does not prohibit anybody from manually revising it. Ther

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Martin Hepp (UniBW) wrote: Hi Tom: >Amen. Thank you for writing this. I completely agree. RDFa has some >great use cases but (like any technology) has its limitations. Let's >not oversell it. We seem to agree on the observation, but not on the conclusion. What I want and suggest is using RDFa a

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Hi Martin, 2009/6/29 Martin Hepp (UniBW) : > Hi Tom: > >>Amen. Thank you for writing this. I completely agree. RDFa has some >>great use cases but (like any technology) has its limitations. Let's >>not oversell it. > > We seem to agree on the observation, but not on the conclusion. What I want > a

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Hi Tom: Amen. Thank you for writing this. I completely agree. RDFa has some great use cases but (like any technology) has its limitations. Let's not oversell it. We seem to agree on the observation, but not on the conclusion. What I want and suggest is using RDFa also for exchanging a bit mor

Contd. .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Kingsley Idehen wrote: On 6/28/09 6:33 PM, "Tom Heath" wrote: Hi Richard, 2009/6/25 Richard Cyganiak : (On the value of content negotiation in general: I think the key point is that any linked data URI intended for re-use, when put into a browser by the average person interested

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

On 6/28/09 6:33 PM, "Tom Heath" wrote: > Hi Richard, > > 2009/6/25 Richard Cyganiak : > > > >> (On the value of content negotiation in general: I think the key point is >> that any linked data URI intended for re-use, when put into a browser by the >> average person interested in linked da

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

On 2009-06 -25, at 13:29, Pat Hayes wrote: On Jun 25, 2009, at 11:44 AM, Martin Hepp (UniBW) wrote: Hi all: After about two months of helping people generate RDF/XML metadata for their businesses using the GoodRelations annotator [1], I have quite some evidence that the current best pract

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Hi Pat, 2009/6/25 Pat Hayes : > With the sincerest respect, Tom, your attitude here is part of the problem. > Maybe, along with many other people, I am indeed still stuck in the > mid-1990s. You have permission to be as condescending as you like. But > still, here I am, stuck. Thoroughly stuck. So

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Martin, 2009/6/27 Martin Hepp (UniBW) : > So if this "hidden div / span" approach is not feasible, we got a problem. > > The reason is that, as beautiful the idea is of using RDFa to make a) the > human-readable presentation and b) the machine-readable meta-data link to > the same literals, the pr

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Hi Richard, 2009/6/25 Richard Cyganiak : > (On the value of content negotiation in general: I think the key point is > that any linked data URI intended for re-use, when put into a browser by the > average person interested in linked data publishing, MUST return something > human-readable. That

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

On 27 Jun 2009, at 11:25, Melvin Carvalho wrote: What happens if you put them in one big tree and use the @content attribute? view-source:http://ontologi.es/rail/routes/gb/VTB1.xhtml -- Toby A Inkster

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Martin Hepp (UniBW) wrote: So if this "hidden div / span" approach is not feasible, we got a problem. The reason is that, as beautiful the idea is of using RDFa to make a) the human-readable presentation and b) the machine-readable meta-data link to the same literals, the problematic is it in

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

On Sat, Jun 27, 2009 at 9:21 AM, Martin Hepp (UniBW) wrote: > So if this "hidden div / span" approach is not feasible, we got a problem. > > The reason is that, as beautiful the idea is of using RDFa to make a) the > human-readable presentation and b) the machine-readable meta-data link to > the sa

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

So if this "hidden div / span" approach is not feasible, we got a problem. The reason is that, as beautiful the idea is of using RDFa to make a) the human-readable presentation and b) the machine-readable meta-data link to the same literals, the problematic is it in reality once the structure

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Bradley Allen wrote: Kingsley- On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 11:40 AM, Kingsley Idehen wrote: Mark: Should we be describing our docs for Google, fundamentally? I really think Google should actually recalibrate back to the Web etc.. The correct question to ask, and the one that I believe Ma

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Martin Hepp (UniBW) wrote: Kingsley: So basically you think that RDF hosting will ne a new market segment with services like small RDF hosting services (same as private Web space packages), free hosting (maybe with ads included in the RDF), etc.? Absolutely!! There's nothing like overtly or c

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Kingsley- On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 11:40 AM, Kingsley Idehen wrote: > Mark: Should we be describing our docs for Google, fundamentally? I really > think Google should actually recalibrate back to the Web etc.. The correct question to ask, and the one that I believe Mark is addressing, is should w

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Mark Birbeck wrote: Hi Martin, b) download RDFa snippet that just represents the RDF/XML content (i.e. such that it does not have to be consolidated with the "presentation level" part of the Web page. By coincidence, I just read this: Hidden div's -- don't do it! It can be tempti

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Kingsley: So basically you think that RDF hosting will ne a new market segment with services like small RDF hosting services (same as private Web space packages), free hosting (maybe with ads included in the RDF), etc.? Martin Kingsley Idehen wrote: >Martin: >I think having a third party rela

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Hi Martin, > b) download RDFa snippet that just represents the RDF/XML content (i.e. such > that it does not have to be consolidated with the "presentation level" part > of the Web page. By coincidence, I just read this: Hidden div's -- don't do it! It can be tempting to add all the content

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Melvin Carvalho wrote: On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 6:44 PM, Martin Hepp (UniBW) wrote: Hi all: After about two months of helping people generate RDF/XML metadata for their businesses using the GoodRelations annotator [1], I have quite some evidence that the current best practices of using .htacc

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

On Jun 26, 2009, at 3:03 AM, Toby A Inkster wrote: On 25 Jun 2009, at 21:18, Pat Hayes wrote: If [RDF] requires people to tinker with files with names starting with a dot [...] then the entire SWeb architecture is fundamentally broken. RDF doesn't. Apache does. I should have said, if t

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Hi Toby, Toby A Inkster wrote: On 25 Jun 2009, at 21:18, Pat Hayes wrote: If [RDF] requires people to tinker with files with names starting with a dot [...] then the entire SWeb architecture is fundamentally broken. RDF doesn't. Apache does. Many hosts do have front ends for configuring Ap

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 6:44 PM, Martin Hepp (UniBW) wrote: > Hi all: > > After about two months of helping people generate RDF/XML metadata for their > businesses using the GoodRelations annotator [1], > I have quite some evidence that the current best practices of using > .htaccess are a MAJOR bo

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Dan Brickley wrote: +cc: Norm Walsh On 25/6/09 19:39, Juan Sequeda wrote: So... then from what I understand.. why bother with content negotiation, right? Just do everything in RDFa, right? We are planning to deploy soon the linked data version of Turn2Live.com. And we are in the discussion of

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Toby Inkster wrote: > Jena (just testing on sparql.org) doesn't seem to handle RDFa at all. The jena GRDDL reader handles RDFa. [1] I've started toying with writing a (direct) RDFa parser, too. Damian [1]

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

On 26/6/09 10:51, Toby Inkster wrote: On Fri, 2009-06-26 at 09:35 +0200, Dan Brickley wrote: Does every major RDF toolkit have an integrated RDFa parser already? No - and even for those that do, it's often rather flaky. Seseme/Rio doesn't have one in its stable release, though I believe one

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

On Fri, 2009-06-26 at 09:35 +0200, Dan Brickley wrote: > Does every major RDF toolkit have an integrated RDFa parser already? No - and even for those that do, it's often rather flaky. Seseme/Rio doesn't have one in its stable release, though I believe one is in development for 3.0. Redland/Rapt

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

On 25 Jun 2009, at 21:18, Pat Hayes wrote: If [RDF] requires people to tinker with files with names starting with a dot [...] then the entire SWeb architecture is fundamentally broken. RDF doesn't. Apache does. Many hosts do have front ends for configuring Apache, allowing redirects to b

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

On 25/6/09 19:06, Jeff Finkelstein, Customer Paradigm wrote: Martin- I agree that the .htaccess file is a big stumbling block for many people with low-cost hosting. Would a lightweight php-based application that could write to the .htaccess / create the RDF file work to solve this easily? I'

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

+cc: Norm Walsh On 25/6/09 19:39, Juan Sequeda wrote: So... then from what I understand.. why bother with content negotiation, right? Just do everything in RDFa, right? We are planning to deploy soon the linked data version of Turn2Live.com. And we are in the discussion of doing the content ne

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Just because it's on your server doesn't mean the visitor to the restaurant's web page has to know that. (Does it?) Hmm, maybe that takes us back to the .htaccess argument I agree the shop owner has to feel ownership. So whatever solution you choose, the shop owner has to have access

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Mark Birbeck wrote: Hi Kingsley, If you are comfortable producing (X)HTML documents, then simply use RDFa and terms from relevant vocabularies to describe yourself, your needs, your offerings, and other things, clearly. Once you've done that, simply leave the Web to do the REST :-) Everythi

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 12:18 AM, Pat Hayes wrote: > With the sincerest respect, Tom, your attitude here is part of the problem. > But in any case, this is ridiculous. RDF is just XML text, for goodness > sake.  I need to insert lines of code into a server file,  and write PHP > scripts, in order t

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Mark- Beautifully put. +1 on a hopefully accelerating trend towards simplicity and ease of adoption. - BPA Bradley P. Allen http://bradleypallen.org +1 310 951 4300 On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 3:34 PM, Mark Birbeck wrote: > Hi Kingsley, > >> If you are comfortable producing (X)HTML documents, then

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Hi Kingsley, > If you are comfortable producing (X)HTML documents, then simply use RDFa and > terms from relevant vocabularies to describe yourself, your needs, your > offerings, and other things, clearly. Once you've done that, simply leave > the Web to do the REST :-) > > Everything else is a te

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Martin, On 25 Jun 2009, at 18:44, Martin Hepp (UniBW) wrote: As a consequence, we will modify our tool so that it generates "dummy" RDFa code with span/div that *just* represents the meta-data without interfering with the presentation layer. That can then be inserted as code snippets via copy

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Jeremy Carroll wrote: Pat Hayes wrote: RDF should be text, in documents. One should be able to use it without knowing about anything more than the RDF spec and the XML spec. If it requires people to tinker with files with names starting with a dot, or write code, or deploy scripts, then the

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Hi Jeremy/Pat, On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 10:16 PM, Jeremy Carroll wrote: > Pat Hayes wrote: >> >> RDF should be text, in documents. One should be able to use it without >> knowing about anything more than the RDF spec and the XML spec. If it >> requires people to tinker with files with names startin

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Martin Hepp (UniBW) wrote: As mostly, recently ;-), I agree with Kingsley - I did not want to say that proper usage of http is bad or obsolete. But it turned out unfeasible for broad adoption my owners of small Web sites. For huge data sources and for vocabularies, the current recipes are fin

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Hi Tom, all, El 25/06/2009, a las 20:30, Tom Heath escribió: Are you referring to the best practices at [1]? Unfortunately the recipes in that document that use .htaccess and mod_rewrite for conneg no longer count as best practices, precisely due to mod_rewrite and .htaccess not being adequate f

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Pat Hayes wrote: RDF should be text, in documents. One should be able to use it without knowing about anything more than the RDF spec and the XML spec. If it requires people to tinker with files with names starting with a dot, or write code, or deploy scripts, then the entire SWeb architectur

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

With the sincerest respect, Tom, your attitude here is part of the problem. Maybe, along with many other people, I am indeed still stuck in the mid-1990s. You have permission to be as condescending as you like. But still, here I am, stuck. Thoroughly stuck. So no amount of condescending "so

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

Hi John: We also thought of hosting meta-data for the users, but I don't like that because I want the shop operators to feel ownership for the data: If the opening hours expressed in RDF are wrong but on the personal Web page of that restaurant, anybody facing closed doors will blame the restau

  1   2   >